How will the proposed law effect bullet-buttoned ar/ak pistols? If you have an 80% ar pistol, would it need to be registered by july 2014?

The change in definition of a "fixed magazine" affects pistols, rifles, and shotguns to exclude the use of bullet buttons. Registration is the way to comply written into the law. Yee has also mentioned top loading.

This really agravates me... Im a hard core gun guy, I swear the only reason I go to California is because I'm active duty military. I have 3-4 year tours coming up, and now not only have they effectively made the Military friendly Assault weapon exemption impossible to obtain but this will get railroaded through too I bet. **** Californias politics and **** all the people stupid enough to either A not vote or B vote for these pigs.

__________________
Originally Posted by compulsivegunbuyer View Post
That Astra is a great gun for shooting hookers

How would it help? That would be a waste of energy.
Now, volunteering for cgf and cgn, to get the word out to the public would be a huge help.
Yee/Adam doesn't give a hoot about your letters

Do that other stuff too, but writing does help. It's a numbers game. Would you rather they say, "well I didn't hear any opposition to it"? Write to your own senator and assembly member, then write to every other senator and assembly member. Keep it brief and polite, and ask them to vote against a specific bill. Here's an example you can tweak depending on the bill and legislator you're writing to. Obviously if you're not in their district then it's not a question of you voting for or against them, but you can tell them you'll actively campaign for, and donate money to, their opponent.

Dear [Senator or Assembly member name],

I'm writing to express my opposition to [bill number]. I oppose this bill and I am asking you to vote against it.

I vote, and if you oppose this bill I will support you in the next election, and I'll actively encourage my family and friends to do the same. If you support this bill you will lose my vote and that of my family and friends.

"...which from their verbosity, their endless tautologies, their involutions of case within case, and parenthesis within parenthesis, and their multiplied efforts at certainty by saids and aforesaids, by ors and by ands, to make them more plain, do really render them more perplexed and incomprehensible, not only to common readers, but to lawyers themselves. " - Thomas Jefferson

I wouldn't talk about this too much, you don't want to give them any ideas.

Edit: where did you find that text?

It is written right into the bill specificly, and is the most significant change since the SB249 version so it was obviously on purpose as a means of compliance, so isn't something that we need to hide or anything

The bill only adds 3 changes. It changes all references to "has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine" to "does not have a fixed magazine", it adds a definition of fixed magazine requiring disassembly of the firearm action to remove, and opens registration. Pretty simple and not much to be secret squirrel about.

It is written right into the bill specificly, and is the most significant change since the SB249 version so it was obviously on purpose as a means of compliance, so isn't something that we need to hide or anything

The bill only does 3 things. It changes all references to "has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine" to "does not have a fixed magazine", it adds a definition of fixed magazine to require disassembly of the firearm action to remove (so excluding bullet button type devices), and opens registration for everyone who now suddenly is in possession of an AW.

I just looked at the bill, all I can see is a few paragraphs.

When I say don't talk about it, I mean don't talk about the implications because they may not realize what door they really are opening. Just saying.

It is written right into the bill specificly, and is the most significant change since the SB249 version so it was obviously on purpose as a means of compliance, so isn't something that we need to hide or anything

The bill only adds 3 changes. It changes all references to "has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine" to "does not have a fixed magazine", it adds a definition of fixed magazine requiring disassembly of the firearm action to remove, and opens registration. Pretty simple and not much to be secret squirrel about.

Anyone see Yee's facebook page for the bullet button? It's hilarious. I wonder how many 'bullet buttoned' AR 15's were responsible for murders in California last year?

How many AR-15s, AK-47s, or any firearm that the "assault weapons" ban was attempting to to ban were legally purchased and owned as 'bullet-buttoned'? Of those, how many were later used to commit a crime.

That's the implication. That once these weapons are in state, they'll be abused or fall into the wrong hands where those magazine locks will come off and people will run around shooting up schools full of children.

(c) Any person who, between January 1, 2001 and January 1, 2014, lawfully possessed an assault weapon that does not have a fixed magazine, as defined in section 30515 and including those weapons with an ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm with the use of a tool, shall register the firearm by July 1, 2014, with the department pursuant to those procedures that the department may establish.
(c) (d) The registration shall contain a description of the firearm that identifies it uniquely, including all identification marks, the full name, address, date of birth, and thumbprint of the owner, and any other information that the department may deem appropriate.
(d) (e) The department may charge a fee for registration of up to twenty dollars ($20) per person but not to exceed the actual processing costs of the department. After the department establishes fees sufficient to reimburse the department for processing costs, fees charged shall increase at a rate not to exceed the legislatively approved annual cost-of-living adjustment for the department's budget or as otherwise increased through the Budget Act. The fees shall be deposited into the Dealers' Record of Sale Special Account.

Leland Yee decided to block me from his facebook page. No, I didn't cuss him out (he leaves stuff like that up) nor did I threaten him. I find it awkward that he holds a public office, a public facebook page, but chooses to deny my freedom of speech on his page...

I wrote:

- he is trying to gain momentum from Cuomo and the NY Ban. I urge you to write to your representatives here, in California

- how many bullet buttoned AR 15's killed people in California last year?

- Why don't you go after handguns?? Have 10 rds, used more in crimes than rifles?

__________________
There is no justification for the public servant police to be more heavily armed than the law-abiding public they serve...Unless...the government's intention is to be more powerful than the people.

Leland Yee decided to block me from his facebook page. No, I didn't cuss him out (he leaves stuff like that up) nor did I threaten him. I find it awkward that he holds a public office, a public facebook page, but chooses to deny my freedom of speech on his page...

I wrote:

- he is trying to gain momentum from Cuomo and the NY Ban. I urge you to write to your representatives here, in California

- how many bullet buttoned AR 15's killed people in California last year?

- Why don't you go after handguns?? Have 10 rds, used more in crimes than rifles?

Funny, I got bloacked as well but was not as nice as you. I wrote someting along the lines of:

Killing an apex predator of the ocean for its fins for soup only to throw the body back into the water to die a horrible death = good. My second ammendment god given rights = bad.
i don't follow your logic Lelan Yee.

nice. Remember to keep it respectful though. The go back to where you came for type comments really got us some bad media last time. Whether you think its racist or not is irrelevant. All that matters is that this is the way it will be perceived and spun. Dont make his job easier.

Those are the sort of questions that need to be censored. Discussion of the possible implications of written legislation will only undermine our cause by providing intel to the opposition, unless it is a deliberate and coordinated misinformation campaign.

I was guessing that the newest bill would basically be a 3rd round of registering as AW's.

I didn't see any language regarding the transfer once registered. Is it safe to assume that once registered your BB gun can no longer be sold or transferred in CA.
If so I think I'm going to transfer my BB guns to my boys 13 and 20 and have them open a DOJ card.
Any language as to an age requirement to register a gun as a RAW?

This sucks because the registered owner of a RAW must be present when the gun is being used.

How did registration work the first time around? Registering didn't invite them in your home for inspections or other such nasties did it?

Actually I meant more after you were registered, when they had you on file if they were free to come knocking and "inspect" or if there were any other catches like that requiring you to give up the right to privacy or any other rights.

This sucks because the registered owner of a RAW must be present when the gun is being used.

Just for this part, that's the way the law is now; can't tell if you might believe this is a new twist.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dutch Schultz

Actually I meant more after you were registered, when they had you on file if they were free to come knocking and "inspect" or if there were any other catches like that requiring you to give up the right to privacy or any other rights.

No, none of that.

__________________The Legislature is in recess. We're immune from most further mischief until the next session begins, late December 2017.

There is no value at all complaining or analyzing or reading tea leaves to decide what these bills really mean or actually do; any bill with a chance to pass will be bad for gun owners.

Just for this part, that's the way the law is now; can't tell if you might believe this is a new twist.

I've been trying to hold back on wild guesses, speculation and panic but from the little bit that has been let out it's looking like they are just going to reopen the AW registration for a 3rd time to include BB guns. So if I do give my children my BB guns and they have them registered then I will no longer be legally able to shoot them with out them.

I currently own several RAW's and am aware that they can't be used with out me being present.

I have a question about "(c) (d) The registration shall contain a description of the firearm that identifies it uniquely, including all identification marks, the full name, address, date of birth, and thumbprint of the owner, and any other information that the department may deem appropriate." Who can I pm?

I wrote Yee a letter this weekend (respectful, of course) expressing opposition. He actually called me and left me a voice mail message yesterday asking me to call him back. I'm in Orange County, so not a voter in his district. Has anyone else received calls back, or spoke to him on the phone?

__________________DISCLAIMER: The information contained herein is general in nature, which may not apply to particular factual or legal circumstances, and is intended for informational purposes only. Consistent with Calguns policy, the information does not constitute legal advice or opinions and should not be relied upon as such. Transmission of the information is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship. Readers should not act upon any information in my posts without seeking professional counsel.

__________________
There is no justification for the public servant police to be more heavily armed than the law-abiding public they serve...Unless...the government's intention is to be more powerful than the people.

I have a question about "(c) (d) The registration shall contain a description of the firearm that identifies it uniquely, including all identification marks, the full name, address, date of birth, and thumbprint of the owner, and any other information that the department may deem appropriate." Who can I pm?